Even in juvenile detention, there\u2019s no reasonable expectation of privacy in jail calls. In re C.C., 2026-Ohio-374, 2026 Ohio App. LEXIS 437 (2d Dist. Feb. 6, 2026).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cTyson, while failing to cite any binding authority in support of his position, essentially calls upon the Court to divine new Independent Source doctrine. The Court will not take up that task here.\u201d And, he cites no authority for his proposition. United States v. Tyson, 2026 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24648 (E.D. Va. Feb. 5, 2026).*<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Having three female CBP officer shifts at the Port of Tampa at night for searches of female travelers was shown to be a BFOQ. Not Title VII violation. Anderson v. Secretary, DHS, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 3800 (11th Cir. Feb. 6, 2026).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Even in juvenile detention, there\u2019s no reasonable expectation of privacy in jail calls. In re C.C., 2026-Ohio-374, 2026 Ohio App. LEXIS 437 (2d Dist. Feb. 6, 2026). \u201cTyson, while failing to cite any binding authority in support of his position, … Continue reading